While sitting in Church this morning, the Pastor pondered the ages-old question raised by Pascal (a 17th century French mathematician, physicist, philosopher, and theologian): Does God exist?

The Wager, as it is called, has four options:

1. If you live a good and honest life and you believe God exists and he does exist, then upon your death, you will gain everything and lose nothing.

2. If you live a good and honest life and you believe God exists and he does not exist, then upon your death, you will neither gain nor lose anything.

3. If you live a good and honest life and you do not believe God exists and he does not exist, then upon your death, you will neither gain nor lose anything.

4. If you live a good and honest life and you don't believed God exists and he does exist, then you will gain nothing and lose everything (your soul).

Pascal reasoned that for the safety of our souls, it is best to live a good and honest life and believe in God.

So, the single question in this poll is Does God exist?. I know I am going to get in trouble with the agnostics since I am offering only a "yes" or "no" answer but when it comes down to it, when we die, the question really does have an absolute answer. Also, just so you know, even though I refer to God as He, my Church tends to refer to God in gender-neutral terms (God Father-Mother) or flat-out feminine (She) terms. Something I have a bit of trouble with at times. Okay, the floor is open to discussion...

[ June 16, 2005, 01:48 PM: Message edited by: m1 ]

Those four wagers only work out if all you have to do is live a good and honest life and believe in God. But what if God doesn't care if you really believe or not, so long as you live a good and honest life? Then you don't lose anything. Or what if your definition of a good and honest life is different from God's?

I think God's definition of a good and honest life concerns love and respect. In the Christian Bible, when Jesus was asked which commandment from the Hebrew Bible was the most important, He said there are two. He said the first most important Commandment is to love your God with all of your heart and the second most important Commandment is to love your neighbor as yourself and that "there is no commandment greater than these" (Mark 12:31). If you have love in your heart and respect others (both of which lead to a strong conscience and moral core), you probably are going to live a good and honest life.

[ June 05, 2005, 08:25 PM: Message edited by: bobby78751 ]

I think that if you believe in yourself then you already believe in God. If not, then you're lost.

It is the second corollary you mention that gives everyone real trouble. It requires that you allow the same freedom of self-belief to others that you allow to yourself.

One cannot hold without the other. Believing these two is divine. Not believing we call hell.

God will always love you, no matter how much you sinned, no matter what the sins. It is unconditional love by God for man. God may not be pleased with the sinning, but God will always love you.

I don't believe in any gods. There is no more evidence for the existence of gods than there is for the existence of unicorns or Santa Claus. Religion is the persistent belief in the unproved.

Some would argue that our existance and the wonder of nature are evidences that god exists. It takes a type of faith to believe our circulatory, neurological and reproductive systems evolved from slim. There's a huge difference in believing in god and in Santa Claus.

On the other hand, I do not believe the god that my family does. That god created man for his amusement knowing he would end up torturing the majority of men for eternity in hell.

That is why it is called faith.

Believe it or not, I believe in God.

I was walking through the park and found a rolex. I believe someone designed and made it. I don't believe an explosion in a metal factory started a string of events that caused that rolex to come into existance. Both beliefs that faith. For me, it simply makes more sense that someone designed and made the watch.....

Both beliefs require faith...

But one hypothesis can be easily tested and proven. The other is inherently unprovable.

What makes one assumption reasonable and the other not is that people and factories exist. Even if one accepted that the existence of the universe requires a creator(and how could that be demonstrated?), that would still not evidence for the existence of gods. I could claim that the universe was created by an invisible turnip currently residing in my sock drawer with equal (meaning non-existent) validity.

The belief in the existence of gods is exactly like belief in the existence of Santa Claus. Both are belief in mythological figures.

If I understand correctly, religious people use faith to mean the belief in something for which there is no empirical evidence. Is this correct?

If you would just let the invisible turnip into your heart, you would understand.

If you want to believe your turnip has the intelligence to create the solar system, more power to you. If you chose to believe we accidently or magically appeared, more power to you. I chose to believe in some type of "god". I believe the complexity of nature implies the existence of a designer(s).

What do you consider necessary for something to be deemed to exist? Physical evidence? Mathematical evidence? Logical evidence?

If anyone says that God does not exist because they cannot see Him, touch Him, or find sufficient proof, then I say.....well, prove to me that "love" exists. You cannot see love, you can't hold it or touch it. There is no physical evidence that love exists. And you cannot prove love mathematically. But if you ask most anyone, they will tell you that they do in fact believe in love. (notice its not considered a given, but that people believe in love) The reason they will say that is because they have felt the physical and emotional effects of love. And most people who believe in God can tell you that they have also experienced God because they have felt His presence in their life and seen events occur in their live contributed to His action.

So if love exists, then God exists (which makes sense if God is love ). If God does not exist for you, then its only because you haven't experienced Him yourself. I have felt God's presence in my life many, many times therefore I know he exists. And even if you don't believe in God, that has no bearing on the truth of His existence.

I actually have trouble accepting the concept of hell...a buddy in college called my situation a crisis in belief. It goes back to a friend who killed himself when we were in high school. Since you can't ask forgiveness for a sin not yet committed, suicide is seen as a sin one can't ask forgiveness for doing. Therefore, many faiths believe the suicide victim to be damned to hell. (I remember classmates in high school who said, "It's between him and God now". I wanted to punch them in the face.) Whereas, given the mental state of most suicide victims, I cannot accept that God would punish someone for a desperate act committed upon oneself. If it is true that he is hell, then I guess I want to be in denial about my friend, but I believe very much so that he will be there to greet me when I die someday and go to Heaven.

I don't think I understand this. It seems to mean that the universe is too complex to fully comprehend and therefore someone must have created it. Is that a fair restatement? If not, could someone explain.

Also, what level of complexity would not imply a designer? How is the distinction made?

As I'm sure everyone knows, this line of reasoning is being used to inject religion into the public school science curriculum.

Does this also 'prove' the existence of leprechauns and Santa Claus? I mean, I got presents as a kid that were marked 'from Santa' so I actually have more evidence for his existence than for gods'. As for the experience of gods in one's life, how does one know that a god is that agent of that experience? How does one distiguish between that experience and a hallucination or other psychiatric phenomenon.

I don't mean to imply that religious people are insane. I'm just curious.

Love is considered to be a feeling or an emotion, not a supreme being who is anywhere in a wide range -- from a benevolent, loving creator who is only concerned that you live a good, honest life at one end, to a demanding taskmaster who insists that you go to a building to worship him every week and give money to his causes at the other.

Even people who believe in love probably realize that love doesn't make the world go 'round. wink

The AP today released the results of a multi-national poll on belief in God and to what extent religion and politics should or should not intersect. We can leave the political implications to another discussion, but the numbers from the U.S. having to do with religious belief (combining several catgories of uncertainty) are:

Of course the matter depends to a large extent upon your definition of \"God\", which in the countries polled would generally coincide with the concept of a "supernatural" or Abrahamic God. Personally I tend toward the southparkian conceit.

[ June 06, 2005, 04:21 PM: Message edited by: redsoxbreath ]

I read the survey in the Globe & Mail today. Reminded me of a previous thread on the differences between Canada and the US. The US appears to be amongst the most devote countries in the Western world. Was amazed at the number who have no doubt in Gods existence and believe that those views should be used to influence public policy.

I have no doubt that God exists in my life but I do not believe religion should shape public policy in any form. I am also a Constitutionalist and a firm believer in the seperation of church and state.

This is a question that has been on my mind lately.....I don't know why, but it has...

I have just started reading "Left Behind" and I will continue with the series of books that follows it......I don't expect the books to tether me either way, but if I keep an open mind, maybe I will start to believe....

Right now, I am just not sure.

If he doesn't exist, then why are millions and millions convinced he does...that is what I want to know.....is it all real or did a group of people just write some very believable stories?

One day we will all know the answer.

Is there any society that does not have at least one deity? Isn't faith / belief in a greater being a basic of society? Have we outgrown this or have we just buried it deep in our sub-conscious as we get on with our busy lives. In times of crisis don't most people pray to something / someone, whatever our personal belief system is.

Tnmanfan You are SO right! Santa Claus leaves gifts, and god just kills the people you love..and kittens every time you masturbate.

HotlantaTarheel This nugget was the culmination of some pretty faulty, non-scientific reasoning. That being that all emotions (any emotions) which are improvable, are proof that god exists…because the presence of god is like some sort of emotion, and since we cannot prove emotions, yet we know emotions exist, therefore god exists.

You went to UNC for that?

:confused:

Wasn't there a time most of humanity believed the Earth was flat, the sun revolved around Earth, and gods controlled the weather?

[ June 06, 2005, 07:23 PM: Message edited by: FeverDog ]

Hey now! That sounds like sarcasm. Don't be treadin' on my space.

There was also a time when peeps believed that:
1. the universe was made up of 4 elements
2. witches would float, and non-witches would sink
3. there were people on Mars

Al these things were taken on faith, much like the flatness of earth, and the circulation of the sun around the earth. And as we all know, faith is all you need.

I'm not sure why people think it is better to be a pluralist. I'm not trying to criticize anyone's belief system, but I don't think all religions are equal. In fact, I think Christianity is the most true of all religions. I think Jesus is the perfect expression of God to humanity. Other religions may contain truth, but the whole truth is available in Jesus.

I don't believe that people are going to hell if they don't believe this. Other religions are pretty good. I tend to think that Islam and Taoism are very complete religions. But more truth is available through Jesus. I don't think I am being disrespectful if I choose not to water down my basic belief, and I'm certainly not condemning anyone for believing differently. I just don't think pluralism is better than a committed belief in Jesus.

There is a god that controls the weather. His name is Tom Skilling.

...No, I went to UNC so I could earn more money than you.

The point of my statement was not \"if love exists, then God exists\". My point was that love is something that cannot be seen, held, or calculated and yet people still believe it exists because they have experienced it. Likewise, God cannot be seen, touched, or mathematically proven, but many people still believe in Him because they have experienced Him. I was making this corollary to explain to those who don't believe in God, that it may be that you haven't yet found personal proof. That, however, does not influence the belief of His existence to others.

Yes, over thousands of years, times have changed, people have changed, and science has advanced greatly. But yet, the belief in God still persists. People still acknowledge that there must be something in this universe bigger than ourselves.

I would never say that my religion is superior to anyone's religion. This is dangerous ground to say something like this and alienates those whom you might be trying to reach.

I agree. In faith, all roads lead to God.

I think HotlantaTarheel's overall input was appropriate and honest... i don't think his point was to provide an unchallengeable "proof of God" to pique the interest a logician such as yourself (think of it more as a theorem wink ).

My personal take on this subject is that there is a requisite reasoning behind the "hidden nature" generally associated with God's existence. A possible parallel: tennis!

Take someone who loves the sport and has sweated all over it, thought too often about it, played too much of it, and been wonderfully challenged by it... and get them to explain it to someone who has never seen it. What would the tennis lover say when asked why they play? Surely they wouldn't say "to hit a ball over a net into a rectangle drawn on the ground."

Though i drew that parallel, i think tennis is infinitely simple compared to God. I don't think he wants to be "provable". I think the whole point is for each of us to seek him, to be challenged by him, and to experience him. I think he wants each of us to have a different, personal understanding of him that changes and becomes more intense and complex as we make our way through life.

If we could just write some words about him and have him be explained, who'd want him? Not me.

NateAtl, thanks for your well-written commentary and welcome to Outsports!

I don't think all roads lead to God. I think that Jesus leads to God, and there are possibly some others which have enough truth to work, or which God, in His wisdom, can use. But there are roads that lead away from God, and the best choice is choose the Incarnation, in which God is fully revealed. That's what I think. Would it be simpler to be dishonest? I share this belief which such thinkers as C. S. Lewis, Karl Rahner, John Polkinghorne, Bruce Bawer, Andrew Sullivan, and N. T. Wright. I think it's a point of view worth discussing.

It's like answering the question, "What is the square root of 2?" In a sense, our number system can't answer that question, but "1" is closer than "543." And if you answer "Wyoming," then you are completely off. Jesus is the diagonal of the square, the most perfect represention of this unknowable truth. So it is not superior to believe in Jesus, it is simply choosing the most correct answer.

Whoo Hoo! Snarkiness...I love it. Not above giving points for snarkiness. You've earned 2 points.

I wonder how many of those 70% who proclaimed they definitely believe that God exists would admit that a big part of this is out of fear. Many humans are simply afraid to even let it be a possibility that these years on Earth are all we have. There has to be something else. Otherwise, what a waste, right? Fear plays a big part in organized religion, and I sit here assured that many believe in God because it's too scary to live life with just yourself. They need something to fall back on when times get tough, especially when they need something in particular.

For me, it just really doesn't matter either way. I don't believe in heaven or hell, so whatever happens after I die is of concern. I'm more interested in living the best years I have while on Earth, not worrying constantly about the approval of some being.

Hope you enjoy the books...I loved the series. And I commend you for pursing answers to the question that has been on your mind, especially something so significant as this.

It can be difficult in our culture to approach this question. Oftentimes the frame of reference is a fairy tale, like santa claus, which was/is a fantasy designed to delight children and used to sell lots of product, but not a reflection of a complete being. Or the idea that God created people to put them in hell, which seems illogical and in Biblical accounts is not supported (God created people to be in a relationship with him, not to be separated). Or the subject, (does God exist)/who is God, gets lost by the problems of man's awful abuses in the name of God (Inquisition, Jihad, among too many horrible others).

If possible, seek to expand the framework of your questions, rather than only trying to force the answers to fit into the box of your current understanding. A good book that might help you in your pursuit is "Basic Christianity" by John Stott.

If all roads lead to God, what's the point of the Cross? Why did Jesus weep in the Garden of Gethsemene? Did He say, "Look, this miserable horrible death is just my way of doing things--go ahead and find your own path." I think Jesus went to the Cross because He believed it was the only way to reconcile Creation and God. And I think He wanted to say that any true path to God must go through the Cross. If not, if other ways are equally valid, what's the point of the Passion of the Christ? Seriously?

Because He likes a joke as much as anyone else?

The core failing of Christianity, as I see from the Jewish point of view, is that the emphasis is on faith rather than action. All roads of good deeds and a well lived life lead to G-d. Faith is important because faith inspires action. Faith, in and of itself, is merely thought, and thought is not a path to G-d. Significant sections of Christianity disagree. My true answer to the point of the Cross, if I consider it a path to G-d (which is still open to question), is that it is a focal point of faith and belief, bringing Christians closer to G-dly inspiration and therefore opens them to the actions that are necessary to start on the path to G-d. Consider it the Christian answer to the Wailing Wall or the Kabbah or any of a number of Buddah statues I can't name off the top of my head. It's merely a locus of faith through which one touches G-d.

I think Jesus went to the cross because the Romans and the Jewish leaders (not all the Jews) were scared shitless of the power of Jesus's radical message of inclusive love for all God's children. I don't believe that God was so offended by humanity (which, by the way, he created) that the only way to appease his wrath was to crucify his son on our behalf. That puts God in the position of a divine child abuser.

And don't read John Stott. Read John Shelby Spong or Marcus Borg. They kick ass (in a Christian sense).

[ June 07, 2005, 03:35 PM: Message edited by: willyboy ]

Good Hands...thank you for the reply and I will check out the book you referred too.....

I do feel I am on a quest for the truth, and maybe that is what millions are doing..."A quest for the truth".

Thank you for being kind.

I think the cross is really good for lighting on fire in someone's front yard. You could tie a big crucifix to someone and see if they could swim with it. If you cut the shape onto half a potato you can use it as a stamp to make your own special christian wrapping paper. The cross is really good for making vampires respect your personal space. I wish they would make crucifix toothpicks. Not only could you clean your teeth with more leverage, you could have the picks blessed. That way overworking your gums would produce the blood necessary for a dental hygenic communion.

[quote]FeverDog:
[QUOTE]If he doesn't exist, then why are millions and millions convinced he does...that is what I want to know...[/quote]

Wasn't there a time most of humanity believed the Earth was flat, the sun revolved around Earth, and gods controlled the weather? [/QUOTE

Yes there was a time....but through evolution we know now that the Earth is round...the Earth revolves around the sun...but who controls the weather???? If you say the SUN controls the weahter...well is the Sun a GOD? Who knows??

Listen...a year ago, I would be on your side and say...it has to do with science and blah, blah, blah....but now......I just don't know and I am trying to find the answers..that is all!

I used to say, well if there is a God and Souls and all that stuff....what happens to my dog when he dies?? Is there a real dog heaven?? What happens when I kill that spider?? Am I a murderer of God's creatures? Does that spider go to a spider heaven?? And so on......When we die, do we just die?? That is what I want to know...and that question will only be answered one time and one time only....and that is only when we die...

Keep an open mind....though I feel like a hypocrate from what I used to think, but I guess with age it is okay:)

Have fun, but be careful!

One day we will all know!

I've read everything by John Spong and Marcus Borg. I think they are terrific. However, I don't have to agree with all aspects of their approach. I still think the Cross is the center of Christianity. I'm not suprised when people are offended by that--it was meant to be an offense. Read Spong and Borg, but then read Kierkegaard, Lewis, Gomes, Jim Wallis, N. T. Wright, and Brian McClaren. Also, listen to Prince's song, The Cross. And U2's Sunday Bloody Sunday. And Handel's Messiah.

Would any of you live your day-to-day life differntly if there were empirical evidence one way or the other?

~Adam

Good points. And also, pacer, I hope you would read the Bible. Personally, I find a modern translation, such as the New International Version (NIV), much easier to understand than a King James translation. And if you haven't read the Bible before, and want to understand better what the Bible says about Jesus Christ, I'd recommend beginning with the Gospel of John.

(And I'd say don't get hung up on the hypocrite thing...you're on a journey of discovery and understanding. It is illogical, imo, to think you won't ever gain an understanding that you previously lacked, which would change your view of things. Keep striving, man.)

Adam, to answer your question, no, not really. I would be just as kind to others, I still wouldn't violate the Ten Commandments, and I would pretty much conduct myself in the same manner. It just makes me feel better to know that God is indeed here.

You mean if there was proof God did not exist? I would be very sad but, no, I would live my life as I do now -- as being the best person I can be. It would be the responsible thing to do. I think most people would do the same.

What if God not only proved he existed, but spelled out once and for all what his rules are, and explicitly said "if you're a homosexual you're going to hell unless you change your ways"?

God creates everything perfectly...I firmly believe to my dying breath He created me this way and I can't imagine Him saying such a thing. Plus, Jesus had 33 years on Earth to address this issue and He never said a single word about it.

[ June 08, 2005, 07:55 AM: Message edited by: bobby78751 ]